OKAY...who owns the name CAMARO then?? if not GM WHO!!?!?!?!
This is getting silly..Okay so GM cant use the word CAMARO till 2007?? why..contract, TM, copyrights?? I dont get it? how could GM loose the name to something they own??? they cant make a prototype???
so the "?" is who ownes the right to CAMARO???
and if so why does it say CAMARO is a registered trademark of General Motors??? if so whos lying???
so the "?" is who ownes the right to CAMARO???
and if so why does it say CAMARO is a registered trademark of General Motors??? if so whos lying???
ohh give me a flying F' in break..you got to be kidding me???..my god..UAW did this and GM said okay???
.does this mean they cant use Z28 too???
so why not a Z28 concept?? and I understand the 40th anniversary would be a nice reminder of the "C" words return...
jeshh..
so this is all cus of the UAW that we have no Camaro...
.does this mean they cant use Z28 too???
so why not a Z28 concept?? and I understand the 40th anniversary would be a nice reminder of the "C" words return...
jeshh..
so this is all cus of the UAW that we have no Camaro...
It isn't a matter of who "owns" the name....but rather a matter of who has the right to build the "Camaro" within a period of time agreed to after a plant closing.
GM agreed to certian conditions in return for mucho $$ to bring the f-body assy. to Canada......the ONLY way to get out of the obligations associated with the $$ was if sales dictated a plant closing.......the guarantee to the CAW was to not allow Camaro production to resume anywhere else for a certian period of time...else GM would be in default of the agreement and possibly be forced to give back the $$ or return to a bad situation...
Of course all of this is just my $0.02 you understand...
GM agreed to certian conditions in return for mucho $$ to bring the f-body assy. to Canada......the ONLY way to get out of the obligations associated with the $$ was if sales dictated a plant closing.......the guarantee to the CAW was to not allow Camaro production to resume anywhere else for a certian period of time...else GM would be in default of the agreement and possibly be forced to give back the $$ or return to a bad situation...
Of course all of this is just my $0.02 you understand...
Actually I'd say it's GM that's "fibbing" a bit here. Getting this stipulation made sense for the CAW. How would you feel if you were a worker at St. Therese and GM tells you they have to shut down the Camaro program in 2002 because of "poor sales" and a "sinking coupe market"....only to say "just kidding!" and bring it back after a year off, building it somewhere else? GM has to play the game here and wait it out.
okay so they own the building rights to anything CAMARO...so any performance car GM makes cannot be named CAMARO, but GM ownes the name still..now what about Firebird and T/A? that too?? not that Pontiac needs another performer.if there is a solstice..and the GTO....yea right!!!!..yes they do!!!!
so to that GM cant cant make anything that says Z28 either??? they own the build rights to a build code?
so to that GM cant cant make anything that says Z28 either??? they own the build rights to a build code?
i think this is all a bunch of BS. if it was true, GM should have continued making the Camaros in Canada. i wouldn't belive that the Camaro was so far in the hole as far as unites produced that it wasn't at least breaking even. I mean GM has no problem losing money on every sale on its bottom feeder rent-a-car fleet of Chevrolet "Classics" etc., and somehow the Camaro makes less business sense?
they should have had a program under way for a new camaro just as they're rummored to have now, but should have kept making the old ones until the original contract with the CAW ran out. you don't mean they'd be OBLIGATED to renew it would they?
i think the main problem is its GM dragging its feet on this for some reasons. they're trying to reorgonize the entire corporation and bring out new cars. they're huge. too huge for their own good sometimes. they still have finite resources and they're using them on "sure" things they are almost guaranteed to sell and make money on. Camaro is just not a high enough priority for them, even with Lutz in their midst. the decision to kill it probably came before Lutz anyway. they probably stuck with it to contunue their purge of their old architectures. what's the point of trying to turn around what's already been set in motion for an old car?
they should have had a program under way for a new camaro just as they're rummored to have now, but should have kept making the old ones until the original contract with the CAW ran out. you don't mean they'd be OBLIGATED to renew it would they?
i think the main problem is its GM dragging its feet on this for some reasons. they're trying to reorgonize the entire corporation and bring out new cars. they're huge. too huge for their own good sometimes. they still have finite resources and they're using them on "sure" things they are almost guaranteed to sell and make money on. Camaro is just not a high enough priority for them, even with Lutz in their midst. the decision to kill it probably came before Lutz anyway. they probably stuck with it to contunue their purge of their old architectures. what's the point of trying to turn around what's already been set in motion for an old car?
This story has been floating around the internet for a few years. Can anyone provide a decent source? No, web boards don't cut it. I want something like the Detroit news, Automotive news, a copy on the CAW page, etc,etc.
The Militant
Vol.60/No.39 November 4, 1996
GM Workers End Strike In Canada
BY JOANNE WALLADOR
STE-THÉRESE, Quebec-Members of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) approved a contract with General Motors October 23, ending a 20-day strike by 26,000 workers.
The agreement, which had already been approved by the CAW Bargaining Committee, gives GM the go-ahead to sell two parts plants in Windsor and Oshawa, Ontario. As part of the agreement, workers who go with the new owner will receive their current wages for the next three years, and current pensions and benefits for the next nine years.
According to the contract, GM is not supposed to outsource to contractors hundreds of jobs as they had planned. But GM officials said the agreement allows the automaker to reduce the number of workers it employs because of changes in technology, productivity gains, a market share decline, or if a certain product line is discontinued.
Under the agreement, workers will get an annual wage increase of 2 percent in addition to regular cost-of-living increases. They will also receive a $350 signing bonus. Same-sex partners of CAW members will be eligible to receive health and other non- pension benefits. Mandatory overtime at the remaining Oshawa facilities will be eliminated, although the company retains the right to assign workers at one plant to voluntary overtime at a second plant.
The stakes for GM in this strike were high. While GM's profits for the third quarter of 1996 were $1.27 billion, up from $642 million for the same period last year, they only earn $200 per vehicle produced in North America as compared to Chrysler's $1,000, according to one analyst. In preparation for the walkout, GM amassed a $13 billion cash reserve and stockpiled parts to keep its U.S. assembly operations going.
The strike, which idled all of GM's operations in Canada and nearly 20,000 GM workers in the United States and Mexico, is expected to reduce the company's fourth quarter earnings by about 60 cents a share and result in 90,000 units in lost production. But analysts say GM will probably be able to make up for most of the lost production over the coming months. "This is not going to keep us from being able to perform," Dean Munger, GM's chief Canadian negotiator, said. GM shares on the New York Stock Exchange rose 75 cents on news of the settlement.
"Temporary workers with low wages"
"GM doesn't want to have thirty-year people any more. They want temporary workers who they can pay lower wages," said striker Francois Poiré, a 17-year veteran with GM, who has been laid off from four different GM plants in Canada and has already received his layoff notice from the giant Oshawa complex. Strikers totally blocked access to the South Oshawa complex on October 16 after hearing of GM's strong third quarter earnings. GM was obliged to use helicopters to bring maintenance workers into the plant. Meanwhile, workers occupied the North Oshawa plant to prevent the company from moving dies out of the plant in order to move production elsewhere.
At the Ste-Thérese plant here which makes the Camaro and Firebird sports cars, half of the 2,900 CAW members have been laid off for the past year with only one shift operating. Obligatory overtime of up to 50 hours a week has helped GM avoid calling back workers. The Ste-Thérese plant is the only auto assembly plant in Quebec. The Quebec government granted GM a $220-million interest free loan to keep the plant open in 1987. The car maker has also benefited from tax breaks estimated at more than $100 million.
Since 1992, GM has slashed the number of its money-losing parts plants from fifty to fourteen. An article in the June 3 Wall Street Journal said GM is preparing to cut deeper by "spinning off" its Delphi parts division.
Workers offer solidarity
Eight carloads of striking newspaper workers from the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News, as well as four vans of UAW members and a truckload of food and supplies descended on the picket lines at the GM Windsor facilities in Windsor on Canadian Thanksgiving Day in mid-October.
Lambert Roy, one of 120 employees laid off from the Mackie company in Quebec as a result of the GM strike, told the Montreal daily, La Presse, "If I was in the same situation, I would fight as well."
Katy LeRougetel, a member of CAW Local 187 in Montreal, Marie-Claire David in Montreal, and Mitra Sharma in Toronto contributed to this article.
Last edited by Doug Harden; Sep 16, 2003 at 08:25 PM.
Originally posted by morb|d
i think this is all a bunch of BS. if it was true, GM should have continued making the Camaros in Canada. i wouldn't belive that the Camaro was so far in the hole as far as unites produced that it wasn't at least breaking even. I mean GM has no problem losing money on every sale on its bottom feeder rent-a-car fleet of Chevrolet "Classics" etc., and somehow the Camaro makes less business sense?
they should have had a program under way for a new camaro just as they're rummored to have now, but should have kept making the old ones until the original contract with the CAW ran out. you don't mean they'd be OBLIGATED to renew it would they?
i think the main problem is its GM dragging its feet on this for some reasons. they're trying to reorgonize the entire corporation and bring out new cars. they're huge. too huge for their own good sometimes. they still have finite resources and they're using them on "sure" things they are almost guaranteed to sell and make money on. Camaro is just not a high enough priority for them, even with Lutz in their midst. the decision to kill it probably came before Lutz anyway. they probably stuck with it to contunue their purge of their old architectures. what's the point of trying to turn around what's already been set in motion for an old car?
i think this is all a bunch of BS. if it was true, GM should have continued making the Camaros in Canada. i wouldn't belive that the Camaro was so far in the hole as far as unites produced that it wasn't at least breaking even. I mean GM has no problem losing money on every sale on its bottom feeder rent-a-car fleet of Chevrolet "Classics" etc., and somehow the Camaro makes less business sense?
they should have had a program under way for a new camaro just as they're rummored to have now, but should have kept making the old ones until the original contract with the CAW ran out. you don't mean they'd be OBLIGATED to renew it would they?
i think the main problem is its GM dragging its feet on this for some reasons. they're trying to reorgonize the entire corporation and bring out new cars. they're huge. too huge for their own good sometimes. they still have finite resources and they're using them on "sure" things they are almost guaranteed to sell and make money on. Camaro is just not a high enough priority for them, even with Lutz in their midst. the decision to kill it probably came before Lutz anyway. they probably stuck with it to contunue their purge of their old architectures. what's the point of trying to turn around what's already been set in motion for an old car?
if i remember correctly, i think guiom (dont quote me on this
) said that they couldnt keep producing them because they would have to make several changes to the car involving safetly standards i believe. they needed more safety stuff and they wouldve had to make the greenhouse bigger (doesnt look right, sleek car, huge greenhouse) and they didnt have a 5th generation camaro planned yet, so they couldnt keep making them. they pretty much had no choice but to drop it.if i'm wrong, dont be afraid to correct me
It is not uncommon for automakers to commit to building a certain car or nameplate to a plant for certain guarantees and tax breaks from the locality.
It happens right here at my local plant (Lordstown, OH) where the Cavalier & Sunfire is built... and where Cobalt will be built.
It happens right here at my local plant (Lordstown, OH) where the Cavalier & Sunfire is built... and where Cobalt will be built.


